Americans United - John McCainhttps://www.au.org/tags/john-mccain
enBerating Bigotry: Religious And Policy Groups Respond To Bachmann’s Anti-Muslim Hysteriahttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/berating-bigotry-religious-and-policy-groups-respond-to-bachmann-s-anti
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">A wide swath of the American religious and non-religious community believes Michele Bachmann is all wet.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s efforts to stir up an anti-Muslim witch hunt have sparked a bit of a pushback, to put it mildly.</p><p>As you might recall, Bachmann (R-Minn.) and four other House members (Trent Franks of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Thomas J. Rooney of Florida and Lynn A. Westmoreland of Georgia) sent letters to the inspector general offices of the State, Justice and Homeland Security departments, demanding an investigation into the infiltration of our government by the Muslim Brotherhood.</p><p>This claim of an imminent takeover of the federal government by the Muslim Brotherhood is the latest conspiracy theory to be spat out of the far right-wing “hate-Muslims-hate-Obama” 24/7 nutcase cyclorama. It is getting traction only because we live in an era where, thanks to the Internet and Fox News, any crank with a modem is suddenly a media figure.</p><p>Seeing an opportunity to slam Obama and Muslims, Bachmann, a Religious Right favorite and erstwhile presidential candidate, latched onto this like a pit bull on a postal carrier and hasn’t looked back.</p><p>But the unfantastic five made a big mistake: They fingered Huma Abedin, a top deputy of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as key to the conspiracy. Abedin, who is Muslim, is supposedly neck-deep in this thing because three of her family members are allegedly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Among them is her father, who has been dead for 20 years.</p><p>All of this craziness was too much for U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who <a href="http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/fearmongers-rebuked-mccain-upbraids-house-members-islamic-conspiracy">stood up on the Senate floor </a>and blasted the anti-Abedin crusade in strong language. McCain noted that he has worked with Abedin, considers her a friend and assailed those who question her patriotism.</p><p>Shortly after that, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio)<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/bachmann-affair-against-clinton-aide-huma-abedin-is-a-wake-up-call/2012/07/26/gJQAFHP4BX_blog.html"> told reporters</a> that he doesn’t know Abedin personally but added, “[F]rom everything that I do know of her she has a sterling character. Accusations like this being thrown around are pretty dangerous.”</p><p>Even Ed Rollins, a GOP strategist who managed Bachmann’s presidential campaign, let her have it. Rollins <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/18/bachmann-former-campaign-chief-shame-on-michele/?intcmp=trending#ixzz210ivfo9G">wrote a column</a> stating, “I am fully aware that she sometimes has difficulty with her facts, but this is downright vicious and reaches the late Senator Joe McCarthy level….Shame on you, Michele!”</p><p>The Gang of Five responded by doubling down and insisting that they are right. Gohmert derided McCain and other critics as <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/07/24/576071/tea-party-congressman-calls-mccain-numb-nuts-for-criticizing-bachmanns-anti-muslim-witch-hunt/">“numb-nuts.”</a> (Keep it classy, Louie!) As for Abedin, she received at least one <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/weiner_wife_under_guard_nzAYoiDbaYyQVhYWD2PIgO#ixzz21REIF6la">death threat</a>.</p><p>I’m pleased to say that opposition to Bachmann’s xenophobia is spreading beyond the political world. Yesterday, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/26/michele-bachmann-muslim_n_1706546.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003">42 religious and public policy organizations</a>, including Americans United, signed <a href="/files/pdf_documents/Letter%20to%20Reps%20Bachmann%20Franks%20Gohmert%20Rooney%20and%20Westmoreland%20from%2042%20organizations%207-26-12%20%283%29.pdf">a joint letter</a> to Bachmann and the other four representatives letting them know that this type of religious bigotry has no place in the United States.</p><p>“Far from supporting the safety of our country, these accusations distract us from examining legitimate threats using proven, evidence-based security strategies,” asserts the letter, which was organized by the Interfaith Alliance. “Moreover, we know all too well the danger of casting suspicion on loyal and innocent Americans simply because they hold particular beliefs.</p><p>“We will not stand idly by and allow our country to revive federal investigations into innocent individuals based on their religious adherence. We will continue to speak out in support of people of all faiths and no faith, and the religious freedom of all Americans to practice – or choose not to practice – a religion without fear of criticism or suspicion.”</p><p>The range of signatories is impressive and includes groups that often don’t see eye to eye on other issues. Religious groups signing on include the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Office of Public Witness, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, Friends Committee on National Legislation, the Hindu American Foundation, American Baptist Churches USA, the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the United Church of Christ.</p><p>Secular and public policy groups signing on include the American Humanist Association, American Atheists, the Center for Inquiry, the Secular Coalition for America, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Military Association of Atheists &amp; Freethinkers and the NAACP.</p><p>I’ve worked here a long time and don’t know that I’ve ever before seen a letter endorsed by both the Catholic bishops and American Atheists. I think it’s safe to say that a wide swath of the American religious and non-religious community believes the Bachmann gang is all wet.</p><p>Of course, the Religious Right is still in Bachmann’s corner. The Family Research Council (FRC) has <a href="http://www.frc.org/prayerteam/prayer-targets-marketing-evil-aurora-solemn-assembly-michelle-bachman-chick-fil-a">issued a prayer alert </a>asking its supports to rally around the “vigilant” lawmaker who, they say, is merely asking questions.</p><p>Let the FRC stand with Bachmann – and with the anti-American values she represents. As the new letter indicates, much of the rest of the religious and secular community in America has seen her bigotry and repudiated it.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/other-issues-regarding-churches-and-politics">Other Issues regarding Churches and Politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/descriptions-and-activities-religious-right-groups">Descriptions and Activities of Religious Right Groups</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/michele-bachmann">Michele Bachmann</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/huma-abedin">Huma Abedin</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/louie-gohmert">louie gohmert</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/FRC">Family Research Council</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-boehner">John Boehner</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/ed-rollins">Ed Rollins</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/us-conferene-of-catholic-bishops">U.S. Conferene of Catholic Bishops</a></span></div></div>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:31:47 +0000Rob Boston7347 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/berating-bigotry-religious-and-policy-groups-respond-to-bachmann-s-anti#commentsFearmongers Rebuked: McCain Upbraids House Members’ Islamic Conspiracy Chargeshttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/fearmongers-rebuked-mccain-upbraids-house-members-islamic-conspiracy
<div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Islamic law: Just around the corner? </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Bust out the burqa! Stash your safety razor! Islamic law is just around the corner.</p><p>So says the latest far-right conspiracy theory that’s making the rounds. Word is that a band of Islamic zealots has somehow infiltrated the upper echelons of the federal government – no doubt aided and abetted by the secret Muslim in the White House – and will be imposing shariah law just about any day now.</p><p>This lunacy comes via a House of Representatives’ Cuckoo Caucus, ably led by U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). Last month, Bachmann and four reality-challenged House members (Reps. Trent Franks of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Thomas J. Rooney of Florida and Lynn A. Westmoreland of Georgia) sent letters to the inspector general offices of the State, Justice and Homeland Security departments, demanding an investigation into the infiltration of our government by the Muslim Brotherhood.</p><p>At this point, you may be asking, “What infiltration of our government by the Muslim Brotherhood?” See, that just goes to show that you’ve also been duped by the conspirators. You need to tune in to Glenn Beck more often.</p><p>Much of the “evidence” for this infiltration centers on Huma Abedin, the deputy chief of staff and a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Abedin is a Muslim, and, according to the Bachmann brigade, three of her family members are somehow connected to the Muslim Brotherhood. (One of them is Abedin’s father – who died 20 years ago.)</p><p>Yesterday, U.S. John McCain (R-Ariz.) <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mccain-defends-clinton-aide-against-accusations-of-muslim-conspiracy/2012/07/18/gJQAmoSduW_story.html?tid=pm_pop">took to the floor of the Senate</a> to denounce the campaign against Abedin. McCain called it “sinister” and stated, “Rarely do I come to the floor of this institution to discuss particular individuals. But I understand how painful and injurious it is when a person’s character, reputation and patriotism are attacked without concern for fact or fairness.”</p><p>The salvos against Abedin, McCain said, “are nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack on an honorable woman, a dedicated American and a loyal public servant. These attacks on Huma have no logic, no basis and no merit. And they need to stop now.”</p><p>Bachmann won’t back down. She issued a statement reiterating her belief in “the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical groups’ access to top Obama administration officials.” She vowed, “I will not be silent as this administration appeases our enemies instead of telling the truth about the threats our country faces.”</p><p>We at AU have had our differences with McCain over the years. (Does anyone recall how he labeled Religious Right leaders “agents of intolerance” in 2000 and then, eight years later, issued a groveling apology as he sought their support while running for president?) But yesterday was a proud moment for him, invoking U.S. Army counsel Joseph N. Welch’s famous 1954 retort to red-baiting Sen. Joseph McCarthy: “Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”</p><p>Here’s some more good news on the anti-Islamophobia front. For years, Muslims in Rutherford County, Tenn., have been trying to do something that Christians do every day: open a house of worship. Local officials have erected various roadblocks, and some residents even sued.</p><p>Yesterday, the U.S. Justice Department <a href="http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/July/12-crt-883.html">announced</a> that it is suing Rutherford County over the matter, charging that officials have violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. At the same time, a <a href="http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120718/NEWS06/120718005?gcheck=1&amp;nclick_check=1">federal judge ruled</a> that county officials must give the mosque an occupancy certificate so its leaders can proceed with plans to open the facility.</p><p>I have a little reminder for those who seem to have forgotten some basics: This is America. We enjoy religious freedom. It is for everyone. That even includes groups you don’t like.</p><p>And if you don’t get something that fundamental about our nation, it’s time to look in the mirror and ask who’s really anti-American.</p></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/outside-workplace-discrimination-exemptions-religious-practice-including-military-prisons">Outside the Workplace: Discrimination, Exemptions &amp; Religious Practice (including in the Military, Prisons, Housing, Healthcare, etc.)</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/descriptions-and-activities-religious-right-groups">Descriptions and Activities of Religious Right Groups</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/huma-abedin">Huma Abedin</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/michele-bachmann">Michele Bachmann</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/lynn-westmoreland">Lynn Westmoreland</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/louie-gohmert">louie gohmert</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/trent-franks">Trent Franks</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/thomas-rooney">Thomas Rooney</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/islam">Islam</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rutherford-county">Rutherford County</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/tennessee">Tennessee</a></span></div></div>Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:40:48 +0000Rob Boston7325 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/fearmongers-rebuked-mccain-upbraids-house-members-islamic-conspiracy#comments'Palin-tology': Have Former Alaska Governor's Views On Creationism Evolved?https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/palin-tology-have-former-alaska-governors-views-on-creationism-evolved
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Was Sarah Palin so eager to get on the McCain ticket that she threw creationism under the bus and endorsed evolution?</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>I regard Sarah Palin's new book like I do the movie "New Moon" – I'm not the intended audience and I don't really care about it.</p>
<p>But the media keeps sticking the thing in my face. In the case of Palin's book, it has become obvious that I'm going to be forced to look at the train wreck even though I'd rather not.</p>
<p>So let's just plunge right in, shall we?</p>
<p>It turns out there's actually a church-state angle because release of the book has reopened questions about what Palin does (or does not) believe about evolution.</p>
<p>In <em>Going Rogue</em>, Palin portrays herself as skeptical of evolution. She recounts a story of being questioned by McCain campaign top strategist Steve Schmidt the day before it was announced that she would be McCain's running mate.</p>
<p>As Palin tells it, Schmidt pointed out that Palin's dad is a science teacher and therefore, she must know that evolution is accurate.</p>
<p>Palin writes that she replied, "Parts of evolution. But I believe that God created us and also that He can create an evolutionary process that allows species to change and adapt."</p>
<p>Writes Palin, "Schmidt winced and raised his eyebrows. In the dim light, his sunglasses shifted atop his head. I had just dared to mention the C-word: creationism. But I felt I was on solid factual ground."</p>
<p>To hear Palin tell it, she boldly stood up to the evil secularist Schmidt who wanted to elevate Darwin over Jesus, standing firm for the biblical account of creation.</p>
<p>The problem is, the account contradicts reporting by Shushannah Walshe and Scott Conroy, co-authors of the book <em>Sarah From Alaska: The Sudden Rise And Brutal Education Of A New Conservative Superstar</em>.</p>
<p>In their book, Walshe and Conroy report that it was Palin who first brought up her science teacher father. When challenged about evolution by Schmidt, she replied, "I'm the daughter of a science teacher. My father showed me fossils. I know about evolution, and I accept evolution. That doesn't mean that God didn't set everything in motion."</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/16/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5672707.shtml">two report </a>that Schmidt was satisfied with the answer and didn't wince. (They don't address whether his sunglasses danced around on his head.) Walshe and Conroy say Palin never told Schmidt she backs creationism.</p>
<p>It may seem like a minor incident, but it's interesting because it raises the possibility that Palin was so eager to get on the ticket that she threw creationism under the bus and endorsed evolution.</p>
<p>If that's indeed the case, her retelling of the incident in <em>Going Rogue</em>, with its full-blown embrace of the "C-word," may be little more than damage control and spin – an attempt to mollify her Religious Right fan base.</p>
<p>There could be something to that, because an anonymous former McCain aide said if Palin had endorsed creationism, she never would have ended up on the ticket.</p>
<p>"If she had been, 'I am a creationist,' she would not have been the nominee," the aide said. "McCain wouldn't have gone for that."</p>
<p>What does Palin really believe about evolution? Who knows? Perhaps she's not even sure. But it does look like we'll have more opportunities to find out since Palin seems determined to do all she can to keep herself on the national stage. The question is bound to resurface.</p>
<p>So I look forward over the next few years to getting some answers to burning questions: Does Palin believe Satan created the fossil record just to fool us? Were there dinosaurs on Noah's ark? Just how old is the Earth, anyway?</p>
<p>If we have to continue to put up with this woman – and it looks like we do – we might as well try to enjoy ourselves.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/fighting-religious-right">Fighting the Religious Right</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/creationism-amp-evolution">Creationism &amp;amp; Evolution</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/elections">Elections</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/going-rogue">going rogue</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/sarah-palin">sarah palin</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/steve-schmidt">Steve Schmidt</a></span></div></div>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:30:00 +0000Rob Boston2041 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/palin-tology-have-former-alaska-governors-views-on-creationism-evolved#commentsChurch Disservice: Candidates, Clergy Mix Religion And Politics Unwiselyhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/church-disservice-candidates-clergy-mix-religion-and-politics-unwisely
<a href="/about/people/bathija">Sandhya Bathija</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Many Americans recognize that our country has reached a new low in muddling faith and politics. Yet that doesn&#039;t seem to deter the candidates and some religious leaders from exploiting religion for partisan ends and undermining the basic principle of church-state separation.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Tomorrow, the 2008 election will be over, and the staff at Americans United can finally breathe a sigh of relief.</p>
<p>That relief won't be based on the election's outcome, but rather from no longer having to advocate constantly against the excessive use and abuse of religion in this presidential election -- an abuse committed by both the political left and right.</p>
<p>Many Americans recognize that our country has reached a new low in muddling faith and politics. Yet that doesn't seem to deter the candidates and some religious leaders from exploiting religion for partisan ends and undermining the basic principle of church-state separation.</p>
<p>Just this weekend, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain made their final pleas to church-goers across the country. The <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJlBixvPf4nSBxfbBvSKVfEYsQFAD9472RIO0 ">Associated Press</a> reported that McCain's campaign recruited 15,000 volunteers to hand out literature at Catholic parishes and evangelical congregations. The flyers compared McCain and Obama on social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage and said, "Who shares Your Values? You decide."</p>
<p>While McCain was busy catering to religious conservatives, Obama <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJlBixvPf4nSBxfbBvSKVfEYsQFAD9472RIO0">took his campaign</a> to black churches in battleground states, asking congregants to read a supposedly nonpartisan letter written by him.</p>
<p>Obama's campaign would not release the text of the letter to the Associated Press, but during his primary campaign, his volunteers read another missive to black churches in South Carolina "that didn't explicitly ask people to vote for him but highlighted issues and encouraged voter participation," according to the <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJlBixvPf4nSBxfbBvSKVfEYsQFAD9472RIO0">AP report</a>.</p>
<p>This weekend's activities are just the bitter icing on a rather unappetizing cake.</p>
<p>Religious and political leaders have injudiciously brought faith and politics together far too much in this election. Since May 2007, we have <a href="http://projectfairplay.org/churches-reported-to-irs ">filed </a>Internal Revenue Service complaints about nearly 30 religious institutions and churches from across the country for violating their tax exemption and endorsing candidates.</p>
<p>Back in August, Obama and McCain agreed to stand together on stage for the first time at a fundamentalist mega-church, fielding questions from the Rev. Rick Warren. The candidates <a href="http://blog.au.org/2008/08/18/saturday-night-live-pastor-warrens-biblical-pop-quiz-bombed-with-ny-youth/">answered questions</a> that began with "The Bible says...," followed by what their faith in Jesus Christ means on a daily basis.</p>
<p>After this interview ended, <a href="http://blog.au.org/2008/08/20/saddleback-sideshow-presidential-professions-of-faith-distract-voters-from-the-core-issues-of-the-day/">critics complained </a>that "CNN did...a great disservice by giving a leader of just one of this nation's religious faiths a platform to influence the outcome of the coming presidential election."</p>
<p><a href="http://blog.au.org/2008/08/20/saddleback-sideshow-presidential-professions-of-faith-distract-voters-from-the-core-issues-of-the-day/">Another critic wrote</a>, "Both Obama and McCain gave 'good' answers, but that's not the point. They shouldn't have been asked."</p>
<p>But, unfortunately, some pundits and news reporters have made it their business to ask. And some Americans have taken it so far as to use a candidate's religious beliefs as the sole reason to keep them out of office.</p>
<p>Take former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who simply because of his Mormon beliefs <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiMOuChrkSX_Qkn-pYa-iVMrz6gQD945K63O0">received opposition </a>from some fundamentalist pastors and laity. They said voting for him amounted to endorsing a cult, and he had to answer questions about polygamy and sacred Mormon undergarments.</p>
<p>Obama met with similar religiously grounded attacks, constantly having to insist that he is not a Muslim. The <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiMOuChrkSX_Qkn-pYa-iVMrz6gQD945K63O0">AP reported</a> that U.S. Muslims felt both campaigns treated them as "political lepers."</p>
<p>Our country was founded on secular and democratic principles, not sectarian and theocratic concepts. Yet in this election, it has apparently become acceptable for pastors to grill candidates on their religious beliefs, for clergy to split congregations with partisan politics and for the American public to make those of a minority faith feel like political outcasts.</p>
<p>As Americans United has stated repeatedly this election, we're electing a president, not a pastor. Let's hope when the next four years roll around, Americans get back to the real issues and make it right.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/churches-and-politics">Churches and Politics</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-2008">Election 2008</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rick-warren">Rick Warren</a></span></div></div>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 19:44:12 +0000Sandhya Bathija2304 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/church-disservice-candidates-clergy-mix-religion-and-politics-unwisely#commentsPartisan Propaganda: Christian Coalition Voter Guides Aim To Deceive https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/partisan-propaganda-christian-coalition-voter-guides-aim-to-deceive
<a href="/about/people/bathija">Sandhya Bathija</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">The Coalition&#039;s newest voter guide is clearly biased and does not fairly reflect the positions of presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>The Christian Coalition has unveiled its "nonpartisan" <a href="http://www.cc.org/files/3/2008_Presidential_voter_guide_.pdf">voter guide </a>for distribution at churches and other locations before the November election. In a letter accompanying the document, Coalition President Roberta Combs calls the guide "one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections."</p>
<p>What she didn't say is that her guides are so "powerful" because they are partisan hatchet jobs carefully crafted to give the false appearance of an objective accounting of the candidates' stands on issues.</p>
<p>Churches and other groups that receive a tax exemption may, indeed, distribute voter guides, so long as they are unbiased and neutral toward all candidates. The Coalition's guides,however, never seem to meet this basic standard.</p>
<p>There's a long history here of deception. The Coalition was up to no good from the first day of its founding in 1989 by TV preacher Pat Robertson. Robertson has bailed out of the floundering organization, but it's still churning out partisan propaganda from its small offices in South Carolina.</p>
<p>Americans United has challenged Coalition deception from the beginning. In 2001, AU called out the Christian Coalition for a voter guide that clearly used factually inaccuracies.</p>
<p>At that time, Americans United Executive Director Barry Lynn <a href="http://www.au.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&amp;abbr=pr&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=6011">said</a>, "The guides select specific issues to make the Republican a saint, and the Democrat a sinner." He added, "Just as importantly, the guides phrase the issues in a biased fashion, and then give misleading and sometimes wrong information. These guides don't belong in churches, they belong in the recycling bin."</p>
<p>In 2004, Christian Coalition Field Director Bill Thomson <a href="http://www.au.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&amp;abbr=pr&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=6995">candidly admitted</a> that the guides are intended to affect the outcome of elections. He boasted that the one-page flyers can "change an election between 5 and 7 percentage points," calling them the group's "B-2 bomber."</p>
<p>The Coalition's newest voter guide is also clearly biased and does not fairly reflect the positions of presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama.</p>
<p>For example, it states that Obama supports "an increase in federal income tax rates" while McCain opposes an increase. Throughout the entire election season, Obama's campaign has consistently asserted that his tax plan would decrease income tax rates for 95 percent of the country, so the Coalition's generalization is misleading.</p>
<p>The guide says McCain supports "appointing judges that will adhere to a strict interpretation of the Constitution," and Obama opposes it. What in the world does "strict interpretation" mean? I guess it means whatever the Coalition wants it to mean.</p>
<p>What's even more astonishing is the fact that in 2005, because of a history of questionable voter guides, the Coalition <a href="http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/2005-21692-1.pdf">reached a settlement agreement</a> with the Internal Revenue Service that explained in detail how the Coalition's guides should be drafted.</p>
<p>Under these settlement requirements, the voter guides were not only required to be neutral, but the Coalition was required to "state that the candidate did not respond if no response was received" and that if the organization had to determine the candidate's stance in absence of an answer, it must "indicate the sources used."</p>
<p>The guide deliberately misleads by making it seem Obama and McCain actually responded to the Coalition's questions. Nowhere on the guide does it mention that Obama or McCain did not respond.</p>
<p>Does anyone really think Obama said he supports "sex education for children in kindergarten through 12th grade." Did McCain say he opposes it? I don't think McCain would oppose sex education classes for high schoolers, would he?</p>
<p>We also know the candidates didn't respond to these issues because, from reading the IRS guidelines, the guide is formatted in a way only used if the candidates do not respond. And nowhere in the guide does it state any specific source for the information.</p>
<p>Then Combs has the nerve to say in her letter, "Christian Coalition is the only organization whose voter guides are prepared in accordance with IRS approved guidelines for distribution in churches"!</p>
<p>It's appalling that the Christian Coalition, however insignificant it might have become today, still doesn't think it has to play by the same rules as everyone else.</p>
<p>Any church that distributes this biased and partisan guide will be breaking federal tax law and asking to have its tax exemption revoked.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/churches-and-politics">Churches and Politics</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/christian-coalition">Christian Coalition</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/voter-guides">voter guides</a></span></div></div>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:57:22 +0000Sandhya Bathija2301 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/partisan-propaganda-christian-coalition-voter-guides-aim-to-deceive#commentsFocus On The Flip-Flop: Dobson Decides To Endorse McCain After All https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/focus-on-the-flip-flop-dobson-decides-to-endorse-mccain-after-all
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Dobson listed four reasons why listeners should vote for McCain.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>Back in the fall of 2007, I attended the Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit." The Republican presidential field was quite crowded then, and all of the major contenders <a href="http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=cs_&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=9471">showed up</a> to seek the Religious Right's support.</p>
<p>Some were received with more enthusiasm than others. Mike Huckabee was a big hit, while Fred Thompson fizzled. The reaction to U.S. Sen. John McCain was polite but restrained.</p>
<p>A straw poll was held, and the results clearly indicated the depth of the Religious Right's antipathy toward McCain. He came in dead last, edged out even by U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter!</p>
<p>Back then, various Religious Right honchos talked a tough line about McCain. Among them was James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Dobson went so far as to say he would never vote for McCain.</p>
<p>Flash forward to fall of 2008. Suddenly McCain doesn't look so bad to the Religious Right. One by one, its leaders have climbed aboard the McCain bandwagon. Yesterday, Dobson officially flip-flopped and <a href="http://focusfamaction.edgeboss.net/download/focusfamaction/c4daily/2008-10-06-daily-c4.mp3">offered McCain his endorsement</a>.</p>
<p>On the air, Dobson read from a letter Focus on the Family Action, his more overtly political operation, is sending to supporters this month. In the letter, Dobson explains why "those who embrace a biblical worldview" must vote for McCain.</p>
<p>Employing some creative verbal judo, Dobson attempted to argue that he's not really endorsing the Arizona senator.</p>
<p>"While I will not endorse either candidate this year...I can say I'm now supportive of Sen. John McCain in his bid for the presidency," he said.</p>
<p>Dobson then went on to list four reasons why listeners should vote for McCain (McCain opposes abortion, the GOP 2008 platform is extremely conservative, McCain selected evangelical Christian Sarah Plain as his running mate and Democratic nominee U.S. Sen. Barack Obama is too liberal). He harshly criticized Obama for his views and attacked his running mate, U.S. Sen. Joe Biden. His arguments were a rehash of various GOP talking points against the Obama-Biden ticket.</p>
<p>Dobson can split all of the hairs he wants. His broadcast is obviously an endorsement of McCain. It shows once again how top leaders of the Religious Right, who claim to be a leading a movement that puts principle above party, long ago became a collection of partisan operatives who make the necessary political compromises to try to keep their hold on power.</p>
<p>More than a year ago, as I sat in the ballroom during the Values Voter Summit listening to McCain and the other GOP hopefuls, I felt reasonably confident that if McCain got the nod, Dobson would end up falling in line.</p>
<p>He didn't disappoint me. Listening to his message yesterday, it seemed to me the only thing missing was an audio clip from McCain at the end: "I'm John McCain, and I approve this message."</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/fighting-religious-right">Fighting the Religious Right</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-dobson">James Dobson</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span></div></div>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:32:41 +0000Rob Boston1910 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/focus-on-the-flip-flop-dobson-decides-to-endorse-mccain-after-all#commentsOf Pigs, Lipstick And Elections: Candidates Should Be Talking About Serious Constitutional Concerns https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/of-pigs-lipstick-and-elections-candidates-should-be-talking-about-serious
<a href="/about/people/bathija">Sandhya Bathija</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">No matter who the pig is and what color lipstick he or she may or may not be wearing, Americans have a big decision to make come November &amp;mdash; and wasting even one day worrying about pigs and lipstick isn&#039;t helping this country make that decision.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>For the past few days, both presidential candidates have been up in arms about a "lipstick on the pig" comment made by Barack Obama.</p>
<p>People have been wondering: does Obama's comment mean he's sexist? Is he calling Palin a pig? Or is it just an expression that the McCain camp has blown out of proportion?</p>
<p>Here's my thought: No matter who the pig is and what color lipstick he or she may or may not be wearing, Americans have a big decision to make come November -- and wasting even one day worrying about pigs and lipstick isn't helping this country make that decision.</p>
<p>What are the important issues in this election? That's what candidates need to discuss, and religious freedom and other constitutional rights should be at the forefront.</p>
<p>A few weeks ago, First Freedom First (a partnership between The Interfaith Alliance Foundation and Americans United) <a href="//www.firstfreedomfirst.org/files/Candidate%20FFF%20web%20letter.pdf">sent a letter</a> to all of the presidential candidates, reminding them that religious liberty is a core value of the American people. The letters were on behalf of 350,000 Americans from all walks of life who wanted the candidates to remember that Americans have the right to believe in the faith of their choice -- or follow no faith at all.</p>
<p>Here are the five most important principles related to religious liberty we hoped the candidates would consider:</p>
<p> </p>
<ul><li>Every American should have the right to make personal decisions – about family life, reproductive health, end of life care and other matters of personal conscience.</li>
<li>American tax dollars should not go to charities that discriminate in hiring based on religious belief or that promote a particular religious faith as a requirement for receiving services.</li>
</ul><p> </p>
<ul><li>Political candidates should not be endorsed or opposed by houses of worship.</li>
<li>Public schools should teach with academic integrity and without the promotion of religious preference or belief.</li>
<li>Decisions about scientific and health policies should be based on the best available scientific data, not on religious doctrine.</li>
</ul><p> </p>
<p>Hundreds of thousands of Americans came together to petition our candidates to make these issues central. That way, when Americans cast their vote, they know where each candidate stands on protecting religious freedom and defending the separation of church and state.</p>
<p>So Obama and McCain, enough with the pig-and-lipstick talk. It's time to let Americans hear your stands on the real issues. Let's start talking about them.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/lipstick-pig">Lipstick on a Pig</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/sarah-palin">sarah palin</a></span></div></div>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:57:11 +0000Sandhya Bathija2290 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/of-pigs-lipstick-and-elections-candidates-should-be-talking-about-serious#commentsSaturday Night Live: Pastor Warren's Biblical Pop Quiz Bombed With N.Y. Youthhttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/saturday-night-live-pastor-warrens-biblical-pop-quiz-bombed-with-ny-youth
<a href="/about/people/bathija">Sandhya Bathija</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>I headed up to New York City this weekend to visit with some friends from college, but before I arrived, I made sure to let them know that on Saturday night, from 6 to 8 p.m., I had to watch the interviews the Rev. Rick Warren was holding with presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain at his evangelical mega-church. </p>
<p>To that, of course, my 27-year-old friends said, "What?! Why are they doing that at a church?" Followed by, "I will not be watching that. You're on your own."</p>
<p>I thought to myself: how many other 20-somethings across the country are echoing the same sentiments. We hear about this surge of <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/15/obama-attracts-young-evangelicals/">young evangelicals </a>being targeted by both the Obama and McCain campaigns, but honestly, does most of young America really care what Obama and McCain have to say about their religious beliefs? </p>
<p>As Americans United Executive Director Barry Lynn said in his new Beliefnet <a href="http://blog.beliefnet.com/lynnvsekulow/">"blogaglogue"</a> with Religious Right attorney Jay Sekulow, "We aren't hiring a chief theologian for America." </p>
<p>Lynn <a href="http://blog.beliefnet.com/lynnvsekulow/">wrote </a>before the Saturday event: "Whether the questions are about abortion or poverty, how could [the candidates] not throw in a few church-based anecdotes or biblical allusions to this crowd? But why? Surely they know that presidents don't have religious functions (that's what a secular government is all about). So those comments would probably be read as subtle 'I'm really more religious than that other guy' winks and nods." </p>
<p>And certainly, Lynn's predictions were right on target. Even before Saturday's event, we were all more than convinced that Obama and McCain possess deep personal faith. But, Warren made sure to ask about it, and so we had to hear about it again. </p>
<p>The candidates answered questions on whether evil exists and what should be done about it. They answered questions that began with, "The Bible says..." And they were asked what their faith in Jesus Christ means on a daily basis. </p>
<p>Here we are a country with a secular government, electing our president, and candidates are talking about their personal belief in Jesus Christ. Is that what our country's democratic process has come to? </p>
<p>What I think the young people across this country care about, including my friends in New York who chose to tune out Saturday's broadcast, are not which of the candidates prays more, but rather real-life issues such as dealing with high rent and the price of groceries, ending the war and creating more job opportunities so with college degrees, they can do better than just barely scrape by. </p>
<p>So Obama and McCain, now that you've answered Pastor Warren's questions, can we finally stop talking about faith and address these real issues facing America's youth?</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/election-08">Election &#039;08</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/rick-warren">Rick Warren</a></span></div></div>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:47:13 +0000Sandhya Bathija2284 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/saturday-night-live-pastor-warrens-biblical-pop-quiz-bombed-with-ny-youth#commentsVeep Veto?: Religious Right Seeks To Pick McCain's Running Matehttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/veep-veto-religious-right-seeks-to-pick-mccains-running-mate
<a href="/about/people/rob-boston">Rob Boston</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-callout field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">McCain, trailing in national polls, will need to come to some accommodation with the Religious Right.</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>The Religious Right is once again flexing its political muscle.</p>
<p>It's odd. Some media analysts say this movement is dead or dying – but the leadership of the Religious Right apparently hasn't gotten the word yet.</p>
<p>Consider a story in today's <em>Washington Times</em>. (Say what you will about that newspaper founded by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon, but it does have its finger right on the pulse of the Religious Right.) <em>The Times</em> <a href="http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/29/evangelicals-warn-against-mccain-romney-ticket/">reports</a> that prominent Religious Right leaders are creating headaches for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain. They brazenly demand the right to pick his vice presidential candidate. And if the race is as close as some expect it will be, McCain just might have to give in.</p>
<p>Religious Right leaders, <em>The Times</em> reports, are alarmed at the prospect that McCain might pick former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Romney, who sought the GOP presidential nomination himself, has some attractive qualities. He would bring a lot of money to the race and could put Michigan into play.</p>
<p>But Religious Right power-brokers will have none of it. Romney, they say, is a flip-flopper on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage. Worse yet, he's a Mormon.</p>
<p>"McCain and Romney would be like oil and water," longtime Religious Right warhorse and novelist Tim LaHaye told <em>The Times</em>. "We aren't against Mormonism, but Romney is not a thoroughgoing evangelical and his flip-flopping on issues is understandable in a liberal state like Massachusetts, but our people won't understand that."</p>
<p>Religious Right strategist Gary Bauer told the newspaper that many conservative evangelicals want to see Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, on the ticket. Huckabee sought the nomination as well and started off strong. He pulled off an upset in Iowa and carried several states before flaming out.</p>
<p>Bauer said he does not oppose Romney but added, "A lot of the Huckabee supporters said if Romney is McCain's choice, they would bail out in November." An anonymous source referred to Huckabee's backers as "rabid."</p>
<p>Observed <em>The Times</em>, "Longtime social-conservative leaders such as Phyllis Schlafly, Phil Burress, Donald P. Hodel and Mathew Staver said earlier this month that they can rally their voters around Mr. McCain largely on the issues of abortion and the judiciary, as long as they are confident that the vice-presidential candidate is pro-life. They are skeptical about Mr. Romney's views."</p>
<p>Will this audacious gambit by the Religious Right work? As <em>The Times</em> pointed out, white evangelicals have been an important GOP voting bloc for years. McCain has never been particularly popular in this camp, but he also has no reason to antagonize them, especially now that there have been signs of a warming. James C. Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family, once said he would never vote for McCain. Dobson now says he might endorse him.</p>
<p>McCain may already be caving in. Early talk about putting Charlie Crist, the governor of Florida, on the ticket died down after Religious Right leaders complained. McCain, trailing in national polls, will need to come to some accommodation with the Religious Right. He can continue to ignore the movement and hope that fear of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama drives the movement's foot soldiers to the polls or he can throw them a big bone with his vice presidential pick. The latter is not out of the question.</p>
<p>As I've said before, I don't believe the Religious Right is on the wane. I've heard that claim too many times over the years to put stock in it now. But let's say, for the sake of argument that the movement is starting to hit the skids. These recent developments show that the Religious Right intends to go down fighting.</p>
<p>Given the budget and reach of some of these groups – Focus on the Family alone raised nearly $130 million in 2006 and broadcasts to five million people every day – I think they still have some clout. I wouldn't count the Religious Right out of campaign 2008 just yet.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Issues:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/issues/fighting-religious-right">Fighting the Religious Right</a></span></div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/mitt-romney">Mitt Romney</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/religious-right-0">Religious Right</a></span></div></div>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:29:59 +0000Rob Boston1890 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/veep-veto-religious-right-seeks-to-pick-mccains-running-mate#commentsFaith-Based Advice: Coalition Urges Presidential Candidates To Change Bush's Initiativehttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/faith-based-advice-coalition-urges-presidential-candidates-to-change-bushs
<a href="/about/people/joseph-l-conn">Joseph L. Conn</a><div class="field field-name-field-blog-type field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/blogs/wall-of-separation">Wall of Separation</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="prose"><p>In February of 1811, <a href="http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=9b50lax7x1.app5b&amp;abbr=cs_&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=5765&amp;news_iv_ctrl=1062">President James Madison vetoed a congressional bill incorporating an Episcopal church</a> in Washington, D.C. Citing the First Amendment, Madison said the measure "exceeds the rightful authority to which governments are limited by the essential distinction between civil and religious functions."</p>
<p>The bill indicated that the church, among other things, would be caring for the poor and educating disadvantaged children. No federal funds were allocated for these projects, but Madison was wary about any doors the proposal might open.</p>
<p>In his veto message, he told Congress the measure was "altogether superfluous if the provision is to be the result of pious charity." He added that the bill could "be a precedent for giving to religious societies as such a legal agency in carrying into effect a public and civil duty."</p>
<p>In other words, Madison, the Father of our Constitution, thought churches should raise their own donations to do religious work, and he opposed any hint that the federal government might fund religion.</p>
<p>We've come a long way since Madison's day, but we're still discussing the church-state ramifications of government relationships with faith-based charities.</p>
<p>Last week, the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination (CARD) sent <a href="http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/CARD_Letter_on_Faith-Based_Initiative_-_FINAL.pdf?docID=2841">letters to the presidential candidates about the "faith-based" initiative</a>.</p>
<p>The five-page missive gives a brief background about the initiative (including its early incarnation as so-called "charitable choice") and implores John McCain and Barack Obama to honor the Constitution and protect the civil rights and civil liberties of Americans. When religious groups partner with the government, the letter insists, the ground rules have to be clear and strong.</p>
<p>"As you evaluate and formulate policies on the role that community-based and faith-based organizations should play in providing government-funded social services," the Coalition said, "we write to urge you to restore religious liberty and civil rights protections into these partnerships. We believe that the policies pursued under the title 'Faith-Based Initiative' in recent years lack the proper accountability and constitutional safeguards necessary to preserve the independence of religious organizations and protect the civil rights and religious liberty of the employees and beneficiaries of government-funded programs."</p>
<p>The Coalition urged McCain and Obama to dramatically change Bush administration policy and ban religious discrimination in hiring in publicly funded social services run by faith-based groups. The letter also called for the government to clearly protect social service beneficiaries from proselytism and other religious pressures, to deny direct funding to houses of worship and to honor state and local anti-discrimation laws.</p>
<p>The Coalition is broadly based. Its membership ranges from the Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty, the Anti-Defamation League and the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society to the NAACP, the Human Rights Campaign and the National Education Association. Civil liberties groups such as Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the ACLU, Interfaith Alliance and People For the American Way are also on board.</p>
<p>Here's hoping McCain and Obama give the CARD letter careful attention.</p>
</div></div><div class="tags clearfix"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/barack-obama">Barack Obama</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/card">CARD</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/church-state-milestones">Church-State Milestones</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/james-madison">James Madison</a></span>, <span class="field-item"><a href="/tags/john-mccain">John McCain</a></span></div></div>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:24:46 +0000Joseph L. Conn1524 at https://www.au.orghttps://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/faith-based-advice-coalition-urges-presidential-candidates-to-change-bushs#comments